Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021

Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

TBD





















« Was Kerry Honorably Discharged? | Main | Effin' Awesome »
October 13, 2004

The "Smear-Merchants" Are Going to Have a Ball With This One, O'Reilly

Eeesh. I'm not Bill O'Reilly's biggest fan, but I don't wish ill on him either. I don't know who's telling the truth in this unseemly business.

The basic facts seem to be that an O'Reilly producer is claiming sexual harassment, and Bill O'Reilly has jumped first with a lawsuit for extortion against her.

Apparetly she wants 60 large. And by "large," I don't mean thousands. Larger than that.

Jim Lindgren examines the legal issues in play, which are every bit as interesting as speculating about the exact nature of Bill O'Reilly's alleged dirty-talk to a female producer.

Well...

Maybe that overstates it a bit. Just a bit.

I smell Top Ten.


posted by Ace at 02:14 PM
Comments



Can you be sued for being an arrogant self-serving jackass?

Posted by: Ron on October 13, 2004 03:10 PM

Well, as was the case with Martha Stewart, it just might turn out to be the elephant in the room that can't legally be introduced at trial.

Posted by: ace on October 13, 2004 03:22 PM

Ace, I know you can't fight the funny, but please, go easy on this one. O'Reilly and Fox did the only thing you can, faced with a blackmail attempt.

Posted by: Dianna on October 13, 2004 03:31 PM

Well, look, I don't know what's going on here. I'm not pre-judging the situation.

If I did a Top Ten, it would be silly. I'm not looking to gut the man. He annoys me. That doesn't mean I actually dislike him.

Posted by: ace on October 13, 2004 03:33 PM

I know, Ace. I'm sure it would be funny as hell, too. And O'Reilly annoys me when he gets self-important, too, yeah. But I hate the thought of someone who won't give in to blackmail, as squirmingly embarassing as this matter sounds, becoming the butt of jokes.

There's nothing harder than smiling sweetly and saying, 'Publish and be damned.' Even knowing it's the right response. No matter what, it's going to hurt you.

From the Fox complaint, we know at least some of what's going on here. The most damaging revelation is her going to his hotel room, even if she admits nothing whatsoever happened there. Find me anyone who isn't snickering, smirking and nudge-nudge-wink-winking. Except maybe me. Think how that one would have been played by the press.

So the pre-emptive strike, here, is about all Fox can do. Even I felt my eyebrows climbing for my hairline when I read that paragraph, and I should know better. I know O'Reilly's a self-righteous blowhard, and he diligently self-promotes, and so on and so forth, and it's all so deliciously naughty, but can we resist the urge to turn into Kitty Kelly, here?

Sorry about the length of the post, Ace.

Posted by: Dianna on October 13, 2004 03:45 PM

Dianna,

Well, honestly, it was just going to be a Top Ten of Remarks Allegedly Made By Bill O'Reilly, like:

"You're on penis, and you're spinning, counsellor."

I mean, not really hard-hitting.

Also, possibly, not really that funny. That's the only one I've come up with, and I only came up with it now.

Posted by: ace on October 13, 2004 04:15 PM

It looks like Fox sees this as a left wing attempt at a smear campaign - ie the harassment part is just an enabler to embarrass O'Reilly and Fox at a sensitive time. Left wing conspiracy theories, anyone? Anyways, if this is their thinking, then suing first was the right answer - in a PR battle, you want to be setting the agenda, not responding to it.

Posted by: Jezebel on October 13, 2004 04:44 PM
Posted by: Qur'an Pundit on October 13, 2004 06:36 PM

Can you blame him?

If it was Keith Olbermann or Chrissy Matthews, I'd be all over this myself.

Posted by: ace on October 13, 2004 07:28 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
Tucker Carlson claims that it's weird that Ted Cruz is interested in the massacre of Christians by Nigerian Muslims, because he has "no track record of being interested in Christians," then blows off the massacre of Christians by Nigerian Muslims, saying it might or might not be a real concern
Tucker Carlson enjoys using the left-wing tactic of "Tactical Ignorance" to avoid taking positions on topics. Is Hamas really a terrorist organization? Tucker can't say. He hasn't looked into it enough, but "it seems like a political organization to me." Are Muslims slaughtering Christians in Nigeria? Again, Tucker just doesn't know. He hasn't examined the evidence yet. He knows every Palestinian Christian who said he was blocked from visiting holy sites in Bethlehem, but he just hasn't had the time to look into the mass slaughter of Christians in Nigeria that has been going on since (checks watch) 2009. He doesn't know, so he can't offer an opinion. Wouldn't be prudent, you know? Don't rush him! He'll sift through the evidence at some point in the future and render an opinion sometime around 2044.
Of course, if you need an opinion on Jewish Perfidy, he has all the facts at his fingertips and can give you a fully informed opinion pronto. Say, have you ever heard of the USS Liberty incident...?
You'd think that the main issue for Tucker Carlson, who pretends to be so deeply concerned about Palestinian Christians being bullied by Jews in Israel (supposedly), would be the massacre of 185,000 Christians in Nigeria itself. But no, his main problem is that Ted Cruz is talking about it, "who has no track record of being interested in Christians at all." And then he just shrugs as to whether this is even a real issue or not.
Whatever we do we must never "divide the right," huh?
Tucker is attacking Ted Cruz for bringing the issue up because he's acting as an apologist for Jihadism, and he can't cleanly admit that Jihadists are killing any Christians, anywhere. There is no daylight between him and CAIR at this point.
One might conclude that Tucker Carlson himself isn't interested in the plight of Christians -- except as they can be used as a cudgel to attack Jews.
Just gonna ask an Interesting Question myself -- why is it that Tucker Carlson's arguments all track with those shit out by Qatarian propaganda agents and the far left? That if Jews crush an ant underfoot it is worldwide news, but when Muslims slaughter Christians it elicits not even a vigorous shrug?
Garth Merenghi is interviewed by the only man who can fathom his ineffable brilliance -- Garth Merenghi
From the comments:
I once glimpsed Garth in the penumbra betwixt my wake and sleep. He was in my dream, standing afar, not looking my way, nor did he acknowledge me. But I felt seen. And that's when I knew I was a traveler on the right path. I'm glad he's still with us.

Now that's some Merenghian prose.
Garth Merenghi on the writer's craft

Greetings, Traveler. If you still have not experienced Garth Merenghi -- Author, Dream-weaver, Visionary, plus Actor -- the six episodes of his Darkplace are still available on YouTube and supposedly upscaled to HD. (Viewing it now, it doesn't appeared upscaled for shit.)
I think the second episode, "Hell Hath Fury," is the best by a good margin. Try to at least watch through to that one. It's Mereghi's incisive but nuanced take on sexism.
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: The elections! NYC, Virginia, New Jersey, Texas, California, and the future prospects of the Republican party...
Update on Scott Adams:
Scott Adams had approval for this cancer drug but they hadn't scheduled him to get it. He was taking a turn for the worse. Trump had told him to call if he needed anything, so he did. Talked to Don Jr (who is in Africa) , then RFK Jr, then Dr Oz. Someone talked to Kaiser and he was scheduled. Shouldn't have needed it but he did and he says it saved his life.
Posted by: Notsothoreau
Funny retro kid costumes, thanks to SMH
Good to see people honoring Lamont the Big Dummy
Four hours of retro Halloween commercials and specials
The first short is the original 1996 appearance of "Sam," the dangerous undead trick-or-treater from Trick r' Treat.
On Wednesday, we'll see the "Beaver Super-Moon." Which sounds hot.
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Historian and Pundit Robert Spencer joins us for a wide-ranging discussion about the Islamists in our midst: Mamdani in NYC, all across Europe, and others.
Full Episode: The Hardy Boys (and Nancy Drew) Meet Dracula
I don't remember this show, except for remembering that Nancy Drew was hot and the opening credits were foreboding and exicting
Schmoll: 53% of New Jersey likely voters say their neighbors are voting for Ciattarelli, while 47% say the cheater/grifter Mikie Sherrill
The "who do you think your neighbors are voting for" question is designed to avoid the Shy Tory problem, wherein conservative people lie to schmollsters because they don't want to go on record with a likely left-winger telling them who they're really voting for. So instead the question is who do you think your neighbors are voting for, so people can talk about who they themselves support without actually having to admit it to a left-wing rando stranger recording their answers on the phone.
TJM Complains about Wreck-It Ralph The very topical premiere of TJM's YouTube Channel.
Interesting football history: How the forward pass was created in response to the nineteen -- 19! -- people killed playing football in 1905 alone
The original rules of football did not allow forward passes. The ball was primarily advanced by running, with blockers forming lines with interlocked arms and just smashing into the similarly-interlocked defensive lines. It was basically Greek hoplite spear formations but with a semi-spherical ball. As calls to ban the sport entirely grew, some looked for ways to de-emphasize mass charges as the primary means of advancing the ball, and some specifically championed allowing a passer to throw the ball forward.
Recent Comments
one hour sober: "Posted by: Hadrian the Seventh Good luck. Th ..."

[/i]SpeakingfOf: "Speaking of steaks. My brother got some from th ..."

Dr. Claw: "355 'Kerkhoff was the star witness against Guy Re ..."

Dadbod Cargopants: "Fuentes is a troll. There are no real Nazis. Real ..."

Anonosaurus Wrecks, Why Do the Heathen Rage? [/s] [/b] [/i] [/u]: "Oh great! Now it's Day of the Triffids Meets Termi ..."

Hadrian the Seventh : " Getting ready to show The Big Dummy. He's likely ..."

EveR: "Kerkhoff was the star witness against Guy Reffitt ..."

Notsothoreau: "Interesting Substack that modern medicine is a wea ..."

Anonosaurus Wrecks, Why Do the Heathen Rage? [/s] [/b] [/i] [/u]: "Oh great! Now it's Day of the Triffids Meets Term ..."

Notsothoreau: "I bought a reconditioned iPod and two Bose Spind D ..."

BurtTC: "The information being released slowly about 1/6 is ..."

one hour sober: ""Churchy stuff" can generally be found in a 'praye ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives